In this study, which only allowed for the calculation of unadjusted observational associations, higher ORs were observed within the vaccinated versus unvaccinated group for developmental delays, asthma and ear infections.
Now odds are that there are other studies posted on the NIH that shows other incidents where the vaccinated children suffered greatly. Sadly we won’t know until there’s a Republican in the White House.
“The CDC has never looked at long-term health outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children,” attested Professor Brian Hooker, Ph.D., during a presentation to the World Council of Health.
How can this be? Antibodies Protect Against COVID-19 Reinfection. It’s good to see that the NIH at least admits that antibodies do work for those who had COVID. Their own study actually proves it. So why would the antibodies not work for those who haven’t had COVID?
In April of 2021 I had the one and done JJ jab and my antibodies and T-Cells have continued to go up. And guess what? No COVID. My family doctor and a scientist friend of his at Johns Hopkins both agree. We have this from the NIH.
About 3% to 4% of people with negative antibody tests got COVID-19 in each time period. But those who had antibodies were less likely to have COVID-19 as time went on. Only 0.3% of the people with antibodies had a positive COVID-19 test more than 90 days after. Those without antibodies were 10 times more likely to get the disease.
Western liberal democracies cultivate a range of fictions about their nature and function. In the myths they tell about themselves, the people are sovereign and politicians merely enact their wishes. In reality, and as in all political systems democratic or otherwise, it is the leaders who exercise power and who strive to herd the people in convenient directions. Democracy imposes various constraints on their actions, but does not meaningfully hinder the unilateral decisions of the establishment. To disguise these uncomfortable truths, democracies eagerly engage in various democratic liturgies, among them the popular protest. Leaders prefer protests which favour their prior political programme, and they sponsor these wherever possible, and with as much publicity as possible, to draw attention away from those less convenient demonstrations that they find it necessary to marginalise or even violently suppress.
Since 2021, Letzte Generation have engaged in a monotonous programme of vandalism and civil disturbance. For their trouble, activists have received mostly fines and some mild chiding from politicians. When police were caught on activists’ cameras roughly handling two climate-gluers last week, the German press collectively hyperventilated and police departments swiftly announced investigations against their own officers. The regime very clearly view Letzte Generation as important if sometimes unruly collaborators. They demonstrate on behalf of the core political goals of the Scholz government and lend substance to the fiction that climate measures are an organic, grassroots demand that flows above all from the people.
A man gets a monkeypox vaccine at a clinic in California on August 9, 2022. The Biden administration has seen an increase in vaccine lawsuits and is hiring more attorneys to handle the influx of cases.
PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
The administration of President Joe Biden is hiring additional attorneys to help handle the workload from vaccine lawsuits after seeing a spike in people filing claims.
The COVID-19 pandemic thrust the potential side effects of vaccines into the spotlight, prompting fierce debate about whether the benefits outweigh the potential negative outcomes. While COVID vaccine side effects have been limited, several lawsuits from plaintiffs who have experienced adverse effects have attempted to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable.
A job posting on LinkedIn from the Department of Justice advertised for a trial attorney to specialize in cases related to the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The legislation provides compensation to those injured by certain vaccines.
It’s unclear if the attorneys the Biden administration is hiring will be responsible for COVID-19 vaccine claims. COVID-19 vaccines are covered under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), not the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), according to the Health Resources and Services Administration. Vaccines covered under the VICP include tetanus, measles, mumps and rubella, and polio.
Newsweek has reached out to the Department of Justice on Monday via media form for comment but did not receive a response in time for publication.
The position posted online advised applicants that they will have to handle heavy caseloads and work on cases that involve complex scientific issues that require expert witnesses. Since most cases are resolved without a trial, attorneys should be prepared to engage in settlement and damage negotiations, according to the posting.
A man gets a monkeypox vaccine at a clinic in California on August 9, 2022. The Biden administration has seen an increase in vaccine lawsuits and is hiring more attorneys to handle the influx of cases.PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
Adverse side effects to the COVID-19 vaccine are rare, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), although some have died from them. Myocarditis, among the side effects, is most common in young males.
People who were negatively affected by the vaccine have expressed frustration with getting compensation from the U.S. government. In a recent lawsuit in Louisiana, plaintiffs called the process unconstitutional and a “black hole” in the judicial process. The lawsuit argues that the CICP provides “no timeline” for resolving their cases and one plaintiff had their case denied. The plaintiffs allege the COVID-19 vaccine led them to experience Bell’s palsy, brain blood clots, vascular inflammation and heart palpitations.
The CICP was created in 2005 and was used to deal with claims resulting from public health emergencies like anthrax exposure and the Ebola virus. It offers limited compensation, according to Reuters, and doesn’t have the option to provide compensation for damages or legal fees.
Unaccustomed to handling a large volume of cases, the program was flooded with more than 12,000 COVID-related claims. Only 32 had been deemed eligible for compensation and 1,129 had been denied as of October, according to Reuters.
Petitioners argued they didn’t have the opportunity to review evidence used against them or engage in other basic practices that would be afforded them in a trial. There are no hearings in CICP cases, and the decision is made by unidentified officials based on what a claimant submits.
Frustrations with vaccine injury compensation suits isn’t something unique to COVID claims. Attorneys and activists for years have been pushing for reform, pressing for the hiring of additional staff to handle the VICP cases. As of October, there was a backlog of nearly 4,000 claims, according to Bloomberg. Lawyers working on the cases hope Congress will pass legislation to reform how vaccine injuries are handled and for people to take action against pharmaceutical companies, not just the government.
“‘This is the first domino to fall,” David Carney, a Green & Schafle LLC attorney representing people injured by vaccines, told Bloomberg. “We’re going to start to see a windfall.”
A study by the University of Copenhagen in Denmark determined that kids in this age group who already had a genetic risk of developing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder saw a “significant increase” in diagnoses after the pandemic.
Researchers examined two groups of children, a total of 593, in 2019 and 2021.
Nearly two years before coronavirus became a household word, a National Institute of Health lab in Montana was conducting experiments with bats that focused on the spread of the virus.
The 2018 research was funded by the “Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and a research grant from NIH AID,” according to a report on the study available through the National Library of Medicine.
At the time, Dr. Anthony Fauci was the director of NIAID, a post he held from 1984 until his retirement in 2022.
The research was conducted at the Rocky Mountain Laboratories in Montana, which NIAID calls a “premier NIH facility for biomedical research.”
The experiment sought to determine whether the WIV1-coronavirus could infect and replicate in a group of 12 Egyptian fruit bats.
“They performed exams on the animals daily and measured things like body weight and temperature,” the Daily Mail reported. “Scientists also took samples from the bats’ noses and throats.
“On days three, seven and 28, four of the bats were euthanized and their heart, liver, kidney, spleen, bladder, reproductive organs, eyes and brain were collected for analysis. Scientists also analyzed white blood cell count and antibodies.”
The report on the experiment said that the virus was “unable to cause a robust infection” in the bats, later concluding that the spread of the virus could be specific to some bat species but not others.
Why isn’t Fauci in Jail?
The report also noted that existing research “suggests that a substantial portion of the SARS-like viruses circulating in bats cannot infect humans directly.”
COVID-19 was first reported in China in late 2019. Extensive debate has since raged whether the virus spread to humans through some as-yet-undiscovered animal pathway or was leaked from the Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, where the outbreak was first noticed.
Fauci has scoffed at the lab-leak theory. He has also insisted that no “gain of function” research was approved on his watch. Such research is designed to increase the power of a virus to do harm to its host.
The bats for the 2018 project were obtained from the Catoctin Wildlife Preserve and Zoo in Thurmont, Maryland, the report said. The zoo is not far from the presidential retreat at Camp David.
The activist group White Coat Waste said the site has a history of animal care violations and called it a “crummy roadside zoo.”
Anthony Bellotti, the president and founder of White Coat Waste, denounced the project in a statement.
“Our investigation has uncovered the real-life horror story of how a shady roadside zoo whose curator was an NIH animal experimenter shipped off bats to a deadly government virus lab overseen by Dr. Fauci to be infected with a coronavirus obtained directly from the Wuhan lab that experts believe caused Covid,” he said, according to the Post Millennial.
Two studies, same results. No difference between Vaccinated and Non Vaccinated when it comes to infectiousness by vaccination status with Omicron variant. Medpage and the NEJ both had posted small studies. One on children, and one on adults. Both had the same results. No difference between Vaccinated and Non Vaccinated when it comes to infectiousness by vaccination status with Omicron variant.
The authors noted the results are consistent with a study in adults with the Omicron variant, which found no association between vaccination status and infectivity duration.
Posting the truth. What Tony the Fauch wouldn't tell us.
The Cleveland Clinic and others warned us on COVID. For several years we were being warned about COVID, and the Vaccine effectiveness. But the NIH and Tony the Fauch ridiculed and attacked anyone and everyone who disagreed with them.
These were men and women of Medicine and Science. Folks who did the actual research. Not Administrators who haven’t practiced for years. So I’ll give a few examples and links. You’ll find more in the comments section.
Summary Among 51017 working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees, the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% effective in preventing infection while the BA.4/5 lineages were dominant, and 20% effective while the BQ lineages were. Effectiveness was not demonstrated when the XBB lineages were dominant.
Conclusions Since the XBB lineages became dominant, adults “not up-to-date” by the CDC definition have a lower risk of COVID-19 than those “up-to-date” on COVID-19 vaccination, bringing into question the value of this risk classification definition.
Summary Among 48 344 working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees, those not “up-to-date” on COVID-19 vaccination had a lower risk of COVID-19 than those “up-to-date”. The current CDC definition provides a meaningless classification of risk of COVID-19 in the adult population.
From April 2023.
Conclusions
The bivalent COVID-19 vaccine given to working-aged adults afforded modest protection overall against COVID-19 while the BA.4/5 lineages were the dominant circulating strains, afforded less protection when the BQ lineages were dominant, and effectiveness was not demonstrated when the XBB lineages were dominant.
What’s this tell us? Last year 17% of the population got the jab. This year so far 7%. So Reuters is reporting. I actually thought that last years numbers were much higher. It’s obvious that a lot changed after Musk bought Twitter and we found out how the administration was asking the social media to lie for them.
U.S. public health officials have been optimistic that Americans will get the new vaccines and have recommended that everyone ages 6 months and older receive one.
But demand has dropped sharply since 2021, when the shots were first introduced at the height of the pandemic.
About 17% of the U.S. population, or 56.5 million people, ultimately received last year’s version of the vaccines.
How do you defeat COVID misinformation from the left? You take them to court. It started back in 2020. Between March 2020 and July 2022, there were more than 1,000 court rulings on challenges to government orders and regulations designed to control the spread of Covid, according to Public Health Law Watch.
This from Politico.
Early in the pandemic, the Supreme Court blocked California and New York’s restrictions on religious gatherings to reduce Covid-19 transmission, as well as the CDC’s moratorium on evictions. In 2022, it stayed OSHA’s order that large companies require employees to be vaccinated or regularly tested for the virus. Federal courts have ruled against Biden’s Covid-19 vaccine requirement for federal employees and stopped the CDC’s mask mandate on public transportation. On March 31, a federal judge in Texas struck down the administration’s requirement that employees of Head Start programs be vaccinated.
But not just any court. Medical freedom activists have already started enjoying some successes in front of conservative judges. At the local level, several have sided with plaintiffs who’ve sued hospitals for refusing to give patients ivermectin. But it’s been on the federal level, with Trump-appointed judges, where they’ve enjoyed some of their most significant successes. In 2021, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the Biden administration over a proposed policy that would have required Covid vaccinations for all Head Start employees. In March 2023, Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas, a Trump appointee, struck down the proposed policy. In January 2022, a group of government workers sued the Biden Administration over the president’s vaccination requirements for all federal employees; in 2022, Judge Jeffrey Vincent Brown, whom Trump appointed in 2019, ruled in their favor. That ruling was briefly overturned, but in 2023, the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld it; the opinion was written by Trump appointee Judge Andrew Oldham.
In August 2022, a group of physicians sued the Biden Administration over its efforts to hold social media companies accountable for platforming physicians who spread misinformation about Covid. The plaintiffs, two of whom created the 2020 Great Barrington Declaration to oppose pandemic protections, accused the federal government of violating their First Amendment rights. “The US government used its vast power over social media and big tech to censor legitimate scientific and policy discussion about Covid during the pandemic,” Jay Bhattacharya wrote in a statement. That case is still ongoing, but in March, Trump-appointed judge Terry Doughty, in the Western District of Louisiana, denied a motion to dismiss it.
